Hpmj12(1). book(hpmj a 337346. fm)
Download 193.9 Kb. View original pdf
|
| percentage of female managers do you think effectively demonstrate: consulting, delegating, influencing upward, inspiring others, mentoring, networking, prob- lem-solving, rewarding, supporting others, and team-building? Definitions of each leader behavior were provided in the survey where they could be readily referenced by participants (see Table 1 for the definitions that were provided). For each behavior respondents were given 10 response options 0–10%, 11–20%, 21–30%, 31–40%, 41–50%, 51–60%, 61–70%, 71–80%, 81–90%, and Thus, each participant made 20 estimates of leadership effectiveness 10 for women and then later 10 for men. After respondents indicated their estimates about women, they completed several demographic items. These included place of birth, country of residence, age, sex, years of work experience, years of managerial and/or supervisory experience, type of position (i.e., line or staff, number MANAGERS PERCEPTIONS OF WOMEN AND MEN LEADERS 35 of years in current position, employer industry, employer sector, employer revenue, number of reporting levels between current position and the CEO, number of direct reports, sex of immediate supervisor, sex composition of current work unit, primary language, and highest level of education. After completing these items, respondents were then given the same set of instructions and the list of leadership behaviors that had been given earlier in reference to women and were asked about their perceptions of men leaders. Notably, we did not ask participants to compare women and men managers outright. We reasoned that asking participants to make such direct comparisons could evoke self-presentational concerns about appearing sexist, which in turn could bias responses. Also to discourage direct comparisons, we administered the survey in such away that while participants were answering items about men managers, they were notable to reference or change the earlier judgments they had submitted about women managers. After completing each set of leader items (related to women and related to men, participants were allowed an opportunity to provide open-ended comments about their evaluations. ANALYSES We coded respondents estimates such that a response of 0–10%, 11–20% or would correspond to a 1, 2, or 3 and so forth, resulting in 10 interval response options. To test our hypotheses, we submitted participants mean estimates separately for each of the 10 leader behaviors to a 2 (sex of target women leaders vs. men leaders) × 2 (participant sex female vs. male) mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA), in which target sex was the within-participant variable and participant sex was the between-participant variable. We used a Bonferroni adjusted significance criterion of .005 (.05/10) to correct for multiple tests. RESULTS Feminine Leadership Behaviors Overall, results of ANOVA tests displayed in Table 2 provided partial support for our first prediction (Hypothesis 1) that managers would perceive that significantly more women leaders than men were effective at behaviors we classified as feminine. However, this pattern appeared to be more pronounced among female respondents. Table 3 displays means and standard deviations illustrating the main and interactive tests. As predicted, respondents perceived that more women leaders than men leaders were effective at both supporting others and rewarding subordinates. As PRIME, CARTER, AND WELBOURNE TABLE Results of 2 × 2 Analysis of Variance for Feminine Leader Behaviors df F p h p 2 Measure: supporting others Within subjects effects Target sex 226.47 <.005 .45 Target sex × participant sex 1,279 9.57 <.005 .03 Simple effects Target sex within participant sex (males 63.15 <.005 .19 Target sex within participant sex (females) 1,279 189.53 <.005 .41 Measure: rewarding Download 193.9 Kb. Share with your friends:
|